Regulatory Mechanisms in Stem Cell Biology

Transcription

1 Cell, Vol. 88, , February 7, 1997, Copyright 1997 by Cell Press Regulatory Mechanisms in Stem Cell Biology Review Sean J. Morrison, Nirao M. Shah, the differentiation and self-renewal capacity of single and David J. Anderson* progenitor cells have been demonstrated by subcloning *Howard Hughes Medical Institute experiments. It is not yet clear, however, whether any Division of Biology of these neural stem cells can generate all the different California Institute of Technology classes of neurons found in the adult CNS or PNS, nor Pasadena, California is it clear whether the stem cells isolated from adult brain tissue manifest their multilineage differentiation capacity under physiological conditions in vivo. Introduction The existence of stem cells in the gut (Potten and Stem cells are a subject of intense and increasing inter- Loeffler, 1990), gonads (Dym, 1994), skin (Lavker et al., est because of their biological properties and potential 1993), and olfactory epithelium (Monti Graziadei and medical importance. Unfortunately, the field has been Graziadei, 1979) has been demonstrated indirectly by difficult for the nonspecialist to penetrate, in part bemosaic in vivo lineage marking experiments, anatomicause of ambiguity about what exactly constitutes a stem cell. A working definition is useful in order to pose cal studies, or in vitro experiments. Although the stan- the important questions in stem cell biology. However, dard of proof defined for HSCs or neural stem cells since different people define stem cells in different ways has not yet been achieved, one can proceed on the (for examples, see Hall and Watt, 1989; Potten and Loefalso been proposed that stem cells exist in the liver assumption that stem cells exist in these tissues. It has fler, 1990), formulating a generally acceptable definition can lead to a conclusion similar to that of U. S. Supreme (Sigal et al., 1992), a tissue which can regenerate in Court Justice Byron White s in regard to pornography: response to injury, although this is controversial (Wilson, It s hard to define, but I know it when I see it. A minitypes reenter the cell cycle and contribute the prepon- 1996) because under most conditions differentiated cell malist definition is that stem cells have the capacity both to self-renew and to generate differentiated progeny. derance of regeneration. Although this is in many respects inadequate, it immediately highlights some important problems: How at each cell division is a stem cell able to pass on its stem Properties of Stem Cells properties to at least one of its two daughters? And A number of properties besides self-renewal and differ- what determines whether stem cell divisions will be selfincluding the ability to undergo asymmetric cell divi- entiation potential are frequently ascribed to stem cells, renewing, or differentiating? In considering these and related questions, we will sions, exhibit extensive self-renewal capacity, exist in draw primarily on examples provided by stem cells in a mitotically quiescent form, and clonally regenerate all the mammalian hematopoietic and nervous systems, as of the different cell types that constitute the tissue in well as by C. elegans. The focus on hematopoiesis and which they exist (Hall and Watt, 1989; Potten and Loefneurogenesis reflects the fact that these systems are fler, 1990). Below, we illustrate how many of these prop- the ones in which stem cells have been most rigorously erties are exhibited by stem cells in some tissues or and directly identified. Hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) organisms, but not in others. This helps to distinguish have been isolated using antibodies to cell surface antifrom questions that are highly relevant but specific to the most fundamental questions in stem cell biology gens (Spangrude et al., 1988), and their functional propcertain erties have been established by transplantation into leat systems. It also illustrates the difficulty in arriving thally irradiated host animals under conditions where a universally applicable definition of a stem cell. While the progeny of a single stem cell can be identified some readers will undoubtedly take issue with this point ( clonogenic assays; for review, see Morrison et al., of view, a certain tolerance of ambiguity in the definition 1994). The self-renewal properties of these cells have of stem cells is necessary in order to remain focused been demonstrated by serial transfer into secondary on the mechanistic questions and avoid semantic argu- recipients. ments. The brain has not traditionally been considered a stem Symmetric Versus Asymmetric Divisions cell system because of the dogma that this tissue is Stem cells are often thought to undergo repeated, intrinincapable of regeneration. Recently, however, there has sically determined asymmetric cell divisions that probeen a rediscovery of Altman s original observations duce one differentiated (progenitor) daughter and an- (Altman, 1969) that some regions of the adult brain exthere other daughter that is still a stem cell (Figure 1A). While hibit ongoing neurogenesis, and this has been accommedicinalis, are clear examples of such lineages in Hirudo panied by a surge of activity in identifying the progenitor Drosophila melanogaster, and Caenorhabpanied cells responsible for both embryonic and postnatal neuevidence ditis elegans, in mammalian systems there is stronger ral development (for reviews, see Alvarez-Buylla and that stem cells divide symmetrically (Figures Lois, 1995; Gage et al., 1995; Weiss et al., 1996). Stem 1B and 1C). Symmetric divisions allow the size of the cells in the neural crest (Stemple and Anderson, 1992) stem cell pool to be regulated by factors that control and embryonic central nervous system (CNS) (Davis and the probability of self-renewing versus differentiative di- Temple, 1994; Johe et al., 1996; Reynolds and Weiss, 1996) have been identified using in vitro assays in which visions (for more detailed discussion, see Potten and Loeffler, 1990).

2 Cell 288 a transient fetal stem cell population (Morrison et al., 1994). This makes the entire concept of self-renewal capacity for the lifetime of the organism precarious as a criterion for stem cells. Mitotic Quiescence Another property shared by some, but not all, stem cells is that they divide slowly or rarely. This is thought to be true for stem cells in the skin (Lavker et al., 1993) and bone marrow (Morrison and Weissman, 1994). Other kinds of stem cells, however, divide more rapidly. Somatic stem cells in the Drosophila ovary and mammalian Figure 1. Possible Patterns of Cell Division in Stem Cell Lineages intestinal crypt stem cells have been estimated to divide S indicates stem cell; P indicates a committed or restricted every 12 hr (Potten and Loeffler, 1990; Margolis and progenitor cell. Spradling, 1995). It may be generally true that stem cells (A) All divisions are obligatorily asymmetric and controlled by a cell- in adult tissues are more likely to cycle slowly, but this intrinsic mechanism. Note that no amplification of the size of the quiescence is not an obligatory property of stem cells. stem cell population is possible in this type of lineage. Mother of All Cells (B) A population of four stem cells is shown in which all divisions are symmetric, but half the time are self-renewing. The steadyability to regenerate clonally the entire adult tissue from Another characteristic attributed to stem cells is the state behavior of this population is indistinguishable from that of a population of stem cells like that shown in (A). However, the proba- which they derive, meaning all cell types that constitute bilities of self-renewing versus differentiative divisions could in prin- that tissue (Potten and Loeffler, 1990). In practice, this ciple be different than 0.5 (see Potten and Loeffler, 1990, for further is an extremely difficult criterion to satisfy. Even in the discussion). hematopoietic system, for example, certain classes of (C) A lineage in which individual stem cell divisions are asymmetric with respect to daughter cell fate, but not intrinsically so, as in (A). blood cells such as some kinds of T cells are only The daughters behave differently owing to different local environments produced during fetal life and are maintained in the adult (shaded ovals). Examples of all of the patterns in (A) (C) are by proliferation of committed cells (Ikuta et al., 1990). found in nature, including combinations of (B) and (C). Therefore, adult HSCs can replace most, but not all, blood cells found in the adult tissue (reviewed in Morrison et al., 1994). The mature olfactory epithelium con- Self-Renewal Capacity sists of neurons and sustentacular (glial) cells, but ret- Murine HSCs do not have unlimited self-renewal poten- roviral lineage analysis has shown that only the neurons tial, although a subset is able to self-renew for the life- are regenerated from stem cells in the basal layer (Caggitime of a mouse (for review, see Morrison et al., 1994). ano et al., 1994). These examples illustrate cases where However, in larger, longer-lived animals, such as hu- stem cells regenerate only a subset of the differentiated mans, it is not at all clear that HSCs self-renew for an cell types in a given tissue. We suggest that stem cells entire lifespan; rather, successive subsets of stem cell include all self-renewing progenitor cells that have the clones may become activated with increasing age (Ab- broadest developmental potential available within a parkowitz et al., 1990). Even in small, shorter-lived organ- ticular tissue at a particular time. isms, there is clear evidence that stem cells have life- Some authors do not consider all self-renewing pluritimes less than that of the entire animal. For example, potent progenitors to be stem cells, reserving this cateone of the two somatic stem cells in the Drosphila ovary gory only for the subset with the most primitive characdies or differentiates after about 26 days (Margolis and teristics. This results in a trend to restrict incrementally Spradling, 1995). Thus, not all stem cells have unlimited the stem cell definition to smaller and smaller subsets self-renewal potential. of cells. The concept of a most primitive progenitor is In tissues where serial transplantation of isolated cells inherently ambiguous because it often is based on is not technically possible, it is often difficult to assess largely untested expectations about the properties that the self-renewal capacity of putative stem cells in vivo. correlate with primitiveness. If we are to understand the The mere existence of progenitor cells in an adult tissue biology of self-renewal and pleuripotency, then all selfis not de facto evidence that these cells have undergone renewing pluripotent progenitors in a given tissue extensive self-renewal, as is sometimes assumed, be- should be studied. cause they may simply have persisted in quiescent form. Regenerative Capacity There are, moreover, clear cases of stem cells that exist It has been argued that only regenerative tissues can only transiently during development, such as fetal and have stem cells. The most significant problem with this embryonic HSCs. Oocyte production ceases by birth, definition is that certain tissues or at least certain cell while that of sperm continues into adulthood, yet both types exhibit regenerative capacity only during limited cells derive from primordial germ cells (PGCs) whose windows of ontogeny (e.g., the spinal cord [Sechrist et stem cell properties are indistinguishable in males and al., 1995], or female germ line [Donovan, 1994]). It seems females early in gestation (Donovan, 1994). Thus, not arbitrary to exclude certain classes of progenitor cells all stem cells self-renew into adulthood, and not all adult from consideration simply because they display their stem cells reflect self-renewal of fetal cells. Finally, in regenerative capacity at one stage of development but some cases, adult stem cells may derive neither by self- not at others. The failure of regeneration in the adult renewal nor by persistence of fetal cells, but rather may may be due not to the absence of pluripotent, selfrenewing represent a distinct stem cell class that develops from cells, but to the inability of the injured tissue

3 Review: Stem Cell Regulatory Mechanisms 289 to accomodate or promote their differentiation, as may by relief from inhibitors normally produced by healthy well be the case in most areas of the brain (Alvarez- neurons (or both); no evidence yet exists to distinguish Buylla and Lois, 1995; Gage et al., 1995; Weiss et al., among these possibilities. It is also assumed that such 1996). feedback control of stem cell proliferation is local, either These considerations reinforce the idea that there are by direct signaling to the stem cells or by indirect signaling basic common properties of stem cells that extend via intermediate progenitor compartments (disbasic across diverse species, tissues, and developmental cussed in more detail in Potten and Loeffler, 1990). stages: the capacity to self-renew and to generate progeny Identity of Factors That Control Stem Cell that are fated to differentiate into mature cells. This Self-Renewal and Their Mechanisms of Action raises the question of whether there are common molecular In C. elegans, the germ line stem cells require activathese mechanisms, shared by all stem cells, that underly tion of the Notch-related receptor GLP-1 to retain self- properties. Other properties, such as the ability renewal potential. The ligand for GLP-1, LAG-2, is mem- to divide asymmetrically, to undergo extensive self- brane bound and expressed only by the neighboring renewing divisions, to exist in a quiescent rather than distal tip cell (Henderson et al., 1994). In glp-1 mutants, mitotically active state, and to generate a multiplicity of germline stem cells not only cease self-renewing mitoses, differentiated derivatives, are exhibited by some classes but also undergo meiosis and differentiate into gadifferentiated of stem cells, but not by others. metes (Crittenden et al., 1994). Thus, LAG-2 appears to be necessary both to maintain proliferation and prevent differentiation of stem cells. By contrast, genetic studies Control of Self-Renewal of Notch (a glp-1-related gene) in Drosophila have been Self-renewal potential is the most fundamental property interpreted to suggest that its primary role is to maintain of stem cells. However, to understand self-renewal it cells in an undifferentiated state, whether or not those is not sufficient simply to understand how stem cell cells are actively dividing (Artavanis-Tsakonas et al., proliferation is controlled, because not all cell divisions 1995). Consistent with this, activated forms of mnotch, involve self-renewal. Are there specific signals that cou- a murine homolog of GLP-1, inhibit differentiation of ple mitogenesis to maintenance of the stem cell state? myogenic and neurogenic cell lines without a detectable Or are proliferation and maintenance of the stem cell effect on cell proliferation (Kopan et al., 1994; Nye et state regulated independently by distinct signals? These al., 1994). However, lineage-specific expression of an issues are important because although the size of the activated form of human Notch, tan-1, is found in tumors stem cell pool remains nearly constant in many tissues of primitive lymphoid cells in humans (Ellisen et al., under steady-state conditions, it can expand rapidly in 1991). Taken together, these data suggest that Notch response to tissue damage (Harrison and Lerner, 1991; and its homologs can regulate proliferation or mainte- Paulus et al., 1992; Lavker et al., 1993; Grisham and nance of the undifferentiated state, or both, depending Coleman, 1996). on context. Extrinsic Regulation of Self-Renewal Although a number of growth factors can drive quies- What limits the number of stem cells under steady-state cent HSCs into cycle, despite a vigorous search no facconditions? One possibility is that stem cells can only tors have yet been identified that (singly or in combinaexist in a restricted microenvironment in each tissue, tion) are capable of maintaining self-renewing divisions which provides factors that maintain them and excludes of these stem cells in vitro. In the nervous system, EGF factors that induce differentiation (Trentin, 1970). For promotes proliferation of stem cells from the adult CNS example, intestinal epithelium stem cells appear to be (Reynolds and Weiss, 1992), and basic fibroblast growth localized to a narrow ring of tissue near the base of the factor (bfgf) promotes the self-renewal of embryonic crypts (Potten and Loeffler, 1990). If the amount of space as well as adult CNS stem cells (Gritti et al., 1996; Johe et in such microenvironments (or niches ) is limited, the al., 1996). bfgf also promotes proliferation of primordial number of stem cells would be limited by the number germ cells in culture (Resnick et al., 1992), although it that can fit in that space. Stem cells generated in excess also appears to broaden their developmental potential of the available space would differentiate (Williams et (Donovan, 1994). While these studies have been peral., 1992). Evidence for such a mechanism is scant in formed in vitro, they demonstrate that factors do exist mammals, but in C. elegans the self-renewal of germ that can cause stem cells to self-renew repeatedly when line stem cells requires proximity to the distal tip cell they would otherwise remain quiescent or differentiate. (Kimble et al., 1992), which produces a ligand that pro- Stem cell self-renewal can also be negatively regumotes stem cell divisions (see below). Not all stem cell lated by locally acting or long-range factors. In tissues systems, however, utilize such local control mecha- where stem cells have a restricted location, locally actnisms. For example, PGCs self-renew while migrating ing factors have been sought. For example, proliferation to the genital ridges (Tam and Snow, 1981). of primordial germ cells and intestinal crypt stem cells is The proliferation of stem cells also increases in re- thought to be inhibited by local sources of transforming sponse to tissue damage. For example, in the sensory growth factor (TGF ) (Godin and Wylie, 1991; Podolepithelia of the nose (Monti Graziadei and Graziadei, sky, 1993). Both short- and long-range feedback mecha- 1979) and the inner ear (Forge et al., 1993), damage to nisms are hypothesized to regulate negatively HSC selfthe primary sensory neurons induces the proliferation renewal (Zipori, 1992). Macrophage inhibitory protein of cells that regenerate the lost neurons. In principle, the 1, constitutively produced by macrophages, has been induction of division in such systems could be promoted shown to inhibit the proliferation of multipotent progenitors either by the release of mitogens from dying cells, or (Graham et al., 1990); whether this inhibition occurs

4 Cell 290 locally or at long range is not yet clear. Since HSCs are state without influencing proliferation. Germline progenitors segregated among different bones and organs throughsions in the C. elegans embryo undergo asymmetric divisegregated out the body, at least some factors that regulate selfseries that maintain the germline lineage and produce a renewal must act at long range for the stem cell pool to of progenitor cells that become committed to be regulated in a coordinated fashion. various somatic fates (for review, see Guo and Kemp- In summary, factors that regulate stem cell selfcell hues, 1996). This asymmetric segregation of daughter renewal can induce or inhibit proliferation, and can act fates appears to be determined by the nuclear pro- locally or at long range. Few of the factors involved tein PIE-1, which is maternally inherited and asymmetri- have been identified. In cases where factors have been cally distributed to the germline daughter cells (Mello identified, it is usually not known what cells produce et al., 1996). PIE-1 represses the transcription of embry- them, or how their production is regulated. It will be onic genes that cause commitment to particular somatic interesting to determine whether there are systematic fates (Seydoux et al., 1996). Thus, one mechanism for differences in stem cell regulation between tissues with maintaining the stem cell state is to actively repress relatively invariant architecture, like intestinal crypts, genes required for commitment. Transmission of this and those with more flexible architecture, like the hemafor maintaining expression of such active repressors. state to daughter stem cells would require a mechanism topoietic system. Evidence for Asymmetric Cell Divisions Do Stem Cells Have Intrinsic Limitations As mentioned earlier, it is often assumed (incorrectly) on Their Self-Renewal Capacity? that all stem cell lineages necessarily involve intrinsically The self-renewal capacity of certain stem cells may exasymmetric divisions (Figure 1A). There are several wellceed the extent of self-renewal that they actually undocumented examples of such lineages in invertebrates, dergo in vivo. Does that mean that self-renewal capacity including C. elegans germline blastomeres (Mello et al., is unlimited, or are there limitations on self-renewal ca- 1996; Seydoux et al., 1996) and Drosophila neural prepacity even when that capacity exceeds actual selfcursors (Rhyu et al., 1994; Spana et al., 1995). However, renewal fate? The hematopoietic system clearly exemin mammals, there are very few examples of asymmetric plifies that not all pluripotent stem cells have equivalent stem cell divisions. In the ferret cerebral cortex, timeself-renewal capacities. Individual HSCs can exhibit eilapse films have revealed that some progenitor cells ther transient ( 8 weeks) or long-term ( 16 weeks) divide to generate one daughter that remains in the self-renewal capacity (Harrison and Zhong, 1992). This ventricular zone, and another that migrates away, predifference was proposed to depend on the environment sumably to differentiate to a neuron (Chenn and McConencountered by intrinsically similar cells (Uchida et al., nell, 1995). Such asymmetric divisions are correlated 1993). However, fractionation of HSCs by surface marker with an orientation of the mitotic spindle perpendicular expression has revealed distinct subpopulations that to the surface of the ventricle. The further observation exhibit different self-renewal capacities even when the that a mammalian homolog of Notch1 is asymmetrically cells are exposed to equivalent environments in vivo distributed on some ventricular zone cells prior to cytoki- (Morrison and Weissman, 1994), implying that these dif- nesis (Chenn and McConnell, 1995) suggests that at ferences are cell intrinsic. least some molecules are unequally distributed to the The molecular basis of self-renewal capacity remains daughter cells (although it does not mean that the oriento be elucidated. Even in cases where this has been tation of this distribution is independent of environment). shown to be an intrinsic property of stem cells, the Asymmetric divisions of multipotent hematopoietic promolecules need not act in a purely cell-autonomous genitors have also been observed in clone-splitting ex- way. For example, differential expression of adhesion periments (Mayani et al., 1993). molecules could cause different HSC subpopulations to Molecular Determinants of Asymmetry. In Drosophila home to different bone marrow microenvironments that neuroblasts, asymmetric cell divisions are dependent specify different self-renewal fates. Entirely cell-autonothe upon correct mitotic spindle orientation, as well as on asymmetric distribution of several proteins, such as mous mechanisms may, however, be at work as well. Telomerase expression widely correlates with selfnumb and prospero (reviewed in Doe and Spana, 1995). renewal potential in many cell types (Morrison et al., The asymmetric distribution of numb and prospero is in turn controlled by additional regulators, such as inscu- 1996a; Yasumoto et al., 1996). Recently, about 70% of teable (for review, see Doe, 1996). Mammalian homologs fetal liver or bone marrow HSCs, but only rare non-selfof numb have been isolated (Verdi et al., 1996; Zhong renewing multipotent progenitors, were shown to exhibit et al., 1996), and one is asymmetrically distributed in telomerase activity (Morrison et al., 1996a). Unlike tumor some cortical progenitor cells (as well as in cells in other, cells, HSCsare not immortal (Ogden and Micklem, 1976), non-neural tissues) (Zhong et al., 1996), suggesting that and human HSCs show decreasing telomere length with some asymmetric divisions in mammals may also be increasing age (Vaziri et al., 1994). Thus, telomerase may intrinsically determined. Distinct molecular determiregulate self-renewal capacity by reducing the rate at nants of asymmetric cleavages have also been identified which telomeres shorten. Stem cells with long telomeres in C. elegans and yeast (reviewed in Horvitz and Hercould, nevertheless, be caused to differentiate and exit skowitz, 1992; Guo and Kemphues, 1996), but whether the stem cell pool by other factors. these have been conserved in mammals as well is not Maintenance of the Uncommitted State yet known. Apparently asymmetric divisions can also by Intrinsic Factors reflect intrinsically symmetric divisions that place the There is strong evidence for cell-intrinsic factors that daughter cells in different environments that confer different can maintain the uncommitted nature of the stem cell fates (Figure 1C). While such a mechanism has

5 Review: Stem Cell Regulatory Mechanisms 291 the repertoire of potential fates available to a stem cell in a given tissue? How do stem cells choose to exit the stem cell state and begin to differentiate? In cases of multipotent stem cells, how is the choice of a particular differentiated fate made? Determination of the Repertoire of Potential Stem Cell Fates The overall developmental potential of a stem cell is defined by all the types of differentiated progeny it can ultimately give rise to. How is this property encoded in the stem cell in molecular terms? One possibility is that multipotent stem cells might express a set of transcrip- tion factors which individually specify different lineages or combinations of lineages. For example, mutations in the ikaros gene, which encodes a zinc finger protein present in HSCs, prevent the development of multiple lymphoid derivatives (Geogopoulos et al., 1994). How- ever, it is not yet clear whether ikaros acts in HSCs themselves, or is independently required in multiple lymphoid sublineages at later stages of development. The entire developmental repertoire of a given multipotent stem cell could also, in theory, be specified by a single determining factor that sits at the top of a regula- tory hierarchy. A targeted mutation in the bhlh tran- scription factor SCL prevents the development of all hematopoietic derivatives (Porcher et al., 1996), but it is not yet known whether SCL is expressed in HSCs, and, if so, required for their formation, self-renewal, or differentiation. From an evolutionary standpoint, mutations that increased the developmental repertoire of stem cells could lead to increased cellular diversity in a tissue by duplication and modification of cell types. In tissues where different cell types are generated from a multipotent progenitor on a relatively precise schedule, such as the retina, multipotent cells may be competent to generate only one or two specific fates in a given period of development (for review, see Cepko et al., 1996). For example, all retinal cell types derive from multipotent progenitors (Turner and Cepko, 1987), but the competence of these progenitors to respond to environmental signals changes over time (Cepko et al., 1996). There are clear cases where competence is deter- mined by the expression of receptors necessary to re- spond to fate-determining signals, but this need not always be so; in principle, competence may also be determined by expression of signal transduction mole- cules or transcription factors. However, there are few specific examples of this type. How Do Stem Cells Initiate the Differentiation Process? The differentiation of stem cells involves both exit from the uncommitted state and entry into a particular devel- opmental pathway. Evidence from C. elegans indicates that these two aspects are independently controlled. Exit from the stem cell state requires loss of PIE-1, a zinc finger protein that represses the expression of genes involved in commitment to differentiation (Mello et al., 1996; Seydoux et al., 1996). This loss occurs by asym- metric distribution of PIE-1 to stem cell daughters at each blastomere division. However, the absence of PIE-1 in somatic blastomere daughters is insufficient to initiate a program of differentiation: positive-acting transcriptional regulators, such as SKN-1 (Bowerman been shown to control the fate of somatic blastomeres in C. elegans embryos at the four-cell stage (Priess and Thomson, 1987; Mickey et al., 1996), direct evidence for such a process in vertebrates is lacking. Are Asymmetric Cell Divisions the Rule or the Exception? Despite the recent attention to asymmetric stem cell divisions, the available evidence favors a predominance of symmetric divisions in mammalian stem cell systems (Figure 1B). In strictly asymmetric stem cell lineages (Figure 1A), no regulation of stem cell number is possible. But there is ample evidence for such changes in the size of stem cell populations in mammals, implying that symmetric divisions must occur. The absolute number of fetal liver HSCs doubles daily during midgestation (Morrison et al., 1995), and during adult life in mice there is a more than five-fold increase in the absolute number of long-term self-renewing HSCs (Morrison et al., 1996b). Primordial germ cells undergo at least five rounds of symmetric self-renewing divisions while they migrate into the genital ridges during fetal development (Tam and Snow, 1981). Some mammalian stem cell populations may undergo both symmetric and asymmetric divisions, depending on their circumstances. Indeed, neural progenitors in the ferret cortex undergo both symmetric and asymmetric divisions (Chenn and McConnell, 1995). The relative pro- portion of symmetric divisions appears to change over time, with symmetric divisions predominating at early time points when the stem cell pool would be expected to be expanding (Chenn and McConnell, 1995; Taka- hashi et al., 1996). Whether this indicates that a single cell can switch from a symmetric to an asymmetric mode of cell division is not yet clear. Control of Stem Cell Survival As mentioned earlier, the persistence of stem cell popu- lations throughout adulthood likely depends on the sur- vival of quiescent cells, as well as on the ability of cycling cells to self-renew. Evidence for quiescent stem cells has been presented in the liver (reviewed in Grisham and Coleman, 1996), the brain (Morshead et al., 1994), and in bone marrow (Morrison and Weissman, 1994). However, it is still not clear whether such apparently quiescent cells are really in G 0 or whether they are just moving very slowly through G 1. Are there factors that promote stem cell survival, but not necessarily self- renewal? By itself, steel factor (also known as stem cell factor) promotes the survival, but not the proliferation, of HSCs (Keller et al., 1995) and primordial germ cells (Dolci et al., 1991; Godin et al., 1991); however, the regulation of these effects is likely to be complex, since steel factor is not required for the survival of HSCs and can synergize with other factors to promote stem cell proliferation (Ikuta et al., 1991; Resnick et al., 1992). Intestinal crypt (Leigh et al., 1995) and liver stem cells (Fujio et al., 1994) are also regulated by steel factor. These data raise further questions about the regulation of steel fac- tor expression and its combinatorial action with other factors. As more factors are identified, the control of stem cell survival is likely to become an increasing focus of investigation. Control of Stem Cell Differentiation This section will address the main outstanding questions concerning the differentiation of stem cells. What sets

6 Cell 292 et al., 1993), are also required to promote entry into a particular somatic lineage. It is not yet clear whether exit from the stem cell state and initiation of differentiation are also independently controlled in mammals. At one extreme, differentiation might be a default pathway executed by the stem cell when it is removed from a microenvironment that promotes maintenance of the uncommitted state. At the other extreme, specific signals might promote differentiation and consequently exit from the stem cell state. There is evidence that both mechanisms operate in the nervous system. In vitro, CNS stem cells undergo selfrenewing divisions in bfgf, but upon withdrawal of this growth factor they rapidly differentiate to neurons (Johe et al., 1996). On the other hand, the differentiation of cultured neural crest stem cells to autonomic neurons is promoted by BMP2 (Shah et al., 1996; see below). These examples leave open the question of whether the effect of such environmental signals is to regulate transcription factors that maintain the stem cell state (analagous to PIE-1), or factors that promote entry into particular lineages, or both. In either case, such factors are likely to be subject to both negative and positive regulation by environmental signals, which may explain the different effects of such signals on cell fate decisions by CNS and PNS neural stem cells. How Do Multipotent Stem Cells Select Figure 2. The Difference Between Selective and Instructive Mechaa Particular Differentiation Pathway? nisms of Growth Factor Influences on Stem Cell Fate Decisions The choice of fate by a multipotent stem cell could, in (A and B) Selective mechanism in which two different factors (F1 principle, be controlled from inside or outside the cell. and F2) allow the survival and maturation of lineage-committed pro- There is ample evidence from invertebrate systems that genitors generated by a cell-autonomous mechanism; X indicates such choices can be determined nonautonomously by death of the other progenitors. Erythryopoietin appears to work in local cell-cell interactions. For example, in C. elegans, this manner (Wu et al., 1995). (C and D) Instructive mechanism in which the factors cause the an EGF-like signal produced by the gonadal anchor cell stem cell to adopt one fate at the expense of others. Glial growth specifies the fate of vulval precursor cells (for review, factor and BMP2 appear to work in this manner on neural crest cells see Kenyon, 1995). Similarly, in Drosophila, the choice (Shah et al., 1994, 1996). between cone (glial) and photoreceptor cell fates is determined by a transmembrane ligand, BOSS, presented by the R8 photoreceptor (Zipursky and Rubin, 1994). immortalized hematopoietic progenitor cell line yielded While these examples concern cells that do not exhibit multilineage differentiation in the absence of cytokines, the self-renewal capability necessary to fit our definition implying that these growth factors act selectively (Fair- of stem cells, they nevertheless provide important exobservation bairn et al., 1993). In the neural crest, by contrast, serial amples of how extrinsic signals can regulate fate deterthat of individual clones in vitro has indicated mination in multipotent progenitors. differentiation to each of three cell types automination Selective Versus Instructive Actions of Growth Factors nomic neurons, Schwann (glial) cells, and smooth muson Mammalian Stem Cells. In mammalian systems, there cle can be instructively promoted by three signals: is considerable evidence that growth factors and cell BMP2, GGF (a neuregulin), and TGF, respectively (Shah cell interactions can influence the outcome of fate decistem et al., 1994, 1996). Similarly, the differentiation of CNS sions by multipotent progenitors at the population level. cells to astrocytes is instructively promoted by This raises a problem not encountered in invertebrate CNTF (Johe et al., 1996). It remains to be determined systems where the fates of individual cells are easily whether growth factors influence stem cells in the nermonitored. Specifically, growth factors could influence vous system and hematopoietic system in fundamen- individual stem cells in a selective or instructive manner tally different ways, or whether instructive differentiation (Figure 2). In a selective mechanism, the stem cells comowing signals for HSCs have simply not yet been identified mit to a particular lineage independently of the growth to lack of appropriate assays. factors, and the factors act subsequently to control the Instructive Factors Can Influence Differentiation survival or proliferation of such committed progenitors Choices Whose Outcomes Are Stochastic. Instructive (Figures 2A and 2B). In an instructive mechanism, the environmental signals may increase or decrease the growth factor causes the progenitor to choose one linpromote probabilities of choosing a particular fate, rather than eage at the expense of others (Figures 2C and 2D). In or repress them in an all-or-none manner. In hematopoiesis, the relative contributions of these two nematodes, the binary decision between ventral uterine mechanisms remain controversial (see Metcalf, 1991; (VU) and anchor cell (AC) fates by neighboring precursor Mayani et al., 1993). Forced expresson of bcl-2 in an cells is controlled by lateral signaling, mediated by the

7 Review: Stem Cell Regulatory Mechanisms 293 Figure 3. Phylogenetic Variation in the Control of a Binary Cell Fate Decision in Nematodes In each case (A E), a choice between ventral uterine (VU) and go- nadal anchor cell (AC) fates is made by adjacent precursors (called Z1.ppp and Z4.aaa ). In C. elegans (A), the decision is stochastic with a 50:50 probability and nonautonomously controlled by lateral signaling. In Acrobeloides (B), lateral signaling exerts a partial bias on a stochastic decision, so that the probability is about 80:20. In Cephalobus (C), the decision is deterministic yet nonautonomously controlled, while in Panagrolaimus PS1732 (E) it is both deterministic and autonomously controlled. (D) represents an intermediate case between (C) and (E) where the decision is deterministic, but displays autonomy only some of the time in laser-ablation experiments. Although the precursor cells involved do not meet our criteria for a stem cell, they illustrate how the same cell fate decision can be either stochastic or deterministic and controlled by autonomous or nonautonomous mechanisms. Reprinted with permission (from Felix and Sternberg, 1996). NOTCH-like protein LIN-12 and its ligand LAG-2 (Figure 3). In some species, such as Cephalobus, this cell cell interaction produces a deterministic (invariant) outcome (Figure 3C): the same precusor always adopts the VU fate in every animal of the species (Felix and Sternberg, 1996). In others (Acrobeloides), a similar cell cell inter- action produces a stochastic (probabilistic) outcome exhibiting bias (Figure 3B): one precursor becomes the anchor cell roughly 80% of the time (Felix and Sternberg, 1996). Finally, in C. elegans, the outcome is stochastic and unbiased: each precursor has a 50:50 probability of adopting either fate (Figure 3A). In all three cases, the cell cell signaling is instructive, since in the absence of one precursor the other always adopts the AC fate (Felix and Sternberg, 1996). Thus, in different species, instructive signaling can exert a range of bias strengths on stochastic cell fate decisions. Similarly, it has been proposed that the engagement of MHC molecules with either the CD4 or CD8 coreceptors may exert a bias on a stochastic decision by T-cell progenitors between helper and killer cell fates (Davis and Littman, 1994). It is sometimes assumed that if differentiation is stochastic and unbiased, a cell-autonomous mechanism must be at work. However, in C. elegans, the unpredictability of the outcome of the AC/VU decision derives from the equivalent strength of the reciprocal inhibi- tory interactions between AC/VU precursors (Felix and Sternberg, 1996) (Figure 3A). Similarly, where cell-autonomous mechanisms have been inferred from the apparently stochastic behavior of hematopoietic progenitors in vitro (see Suda et al., 1983; Mayani et al., 1993), the cells are usually cultured in complex media containing serum and other sources of undefined factors, and the collective influence of such environmental factors could cause the cells to behave in an apparently unpredictable (stochastic) manner. Autonomous Control of Cell Fate. A selective action of environmental factors implies that the initial choice of differentiated fate by a stem cell is controlled by a cellautonomous mechanism. Such an intrinsic mechanism may yield a stochastic outcome, as has been suggested for HSCs, or a deterministic outcome. In yeast, the mating-type switch is a cell-autonomous fate decision that appears stochastic at the population level, but is deterministic for individual cells according to their previous history (Herskowitz, 1989). In early C. elegans embryos, the assignment of somatic blastomere fate is determined in an autonomous and deterministic manner by the asymmetric partitioning of transcription factors at successive cleavages (Bowerman et al., 1993; Hunter and Kenyon, 1996). Currently there are no clear exam- ples of such cell-autonomous mechanisms operating in a mammalian stem cell. There are, of course, many examples of transcription factors required for the development of particular mam- malian lineages. Although once expressed these factors may impose a cell-heritable and autonomous state of determination on a progenitor cell, the initial decision to express such factors may be nonautonomously con- trolled. For example, the bhlh transcriptional regulator myod is able to confer a cell-heritable state of myogenic determination, owing to its autoregulatory properties, when transfected into cultured fibroblasts (Weintraub et al., 1991). However, in vivo, the expression of this protein in somitic mesoderm is induced by a combination of signals from neighboring tissues, such as the notochord and neural plate (reviewed in Molkentin and Olson, 1996). Moreover, the execution of the muscle differentiation program in determined myoblasts is still regulated by growth factors (Molkentin and Olson, 1996). Thus, the involvement of lineage-specific transcription factors does not imply that either selection or execution of specific fates are autonomously controlled. Order and Pattern in the Segregation of Different Lineages from Stem Cells In principle, multipotent stem cells could generate differ- ent derivatives in a random manner (Figures 4A and 4C), or according to a predictable sequence or hierarchy (Figures 4B and 4D). There is evidence for both mecha- nisms in different systems. In grasshopper, the midline neuroblast sequentially produces neurons, glia, and neurons again (Condron and Zinn, 1994). In the verte- brate retina, different cell types emerge on a predictable schedule (Cepko et al., 1996), although whether individ- ual progenitors generate their differentiated progeny in a fixed order is not yet clear. In contrast, clone-splitting experiments in vitro have suggested that there is no perceptible order or pattern to the emergence of differ- ent lineages from multipotent hematopoietic progenitors (Suda et al., 1983), although since no lymphoid

8 Cell 294 randomly (Figure 4C), or in an ordered, hierarchical manner (Figure 4D). The hematopoietic system may employ both strategies, depending upon the stage of lineage diversification (Suda et al., 1983; Wu et al., 1996). An ordered or hierarchical segregation of lineages at the cellular level may reflect the action of transcription factors that coordinately specify multiple sublineages; for example, there are lymphoid progenitors restricted to B and T sublineages (Wu et al., 1996) and several transcription factors, such as ikaros and E2A, required for both sublineages (for review, see Kehrl, 1995). differentiation was detected it is not clear whether these conclusions apply to HSCs. A related question is whether the immediate progeny of stem cells are committed to a single fate ( direct differentiation; Figures 4A and 4B), or restricted to a subset of fates ( indirect differentiation; Figures 4C and 4D). CNS stem cells generate some progeny fated to produce only neurons (Davis and Temple, 1994), but whether these unifatent cells are truly committed was not determined. Committed neuronal progenitors have been identified in the PNS (Lo and Anderson, 1995), but whether these are directly generated from stem cells is not yet clear. In the hematopoietic system, progenitors committed to single lineages (e.g., B cell or T cell) have been shown to be derived from partially restricted lymphoid progenitors (Galy et al., 1995; Wu et al., 1996). Analagous partially restricted progenitors have been suggested to exist in the neural crest based on in vitro clonal analyses (Le Douarin et al., 1991), but whether these cells are truly committed to a subset of lineages has not been rigorously tested by exposure to appropriate instructive signals. The existence of partially restricted intermediates raises the additional question of whether their developmental potentials are assorted Figure 4. Alternative Modes of Differentiation by Multipotent Stem Cells In each panel, two equivalent stem cells in a population are shown. In a direct mode (A and B), the immediate progeny of stem cell divisions are committed to a single fate. This mode frequently oper- ates in invertebrates. In an indirect mode (C and D), stem cell progeny are partially restricted to a subset of potential fates. This mode operates in hematopoiesis. In either case, the segregation of different lineages can exhibit no perceptible order or pattern ( stochastic; A and C), or can occur according to a defined se- quence or hierarchy ( deterministic; B and D). For convenience, all examples are shown with asymmetric stem cell divisions; however, symmetrically dividing stem cells could operate with each mode as well. Furthermore, hierarchical restrictions, as shown in (B) and (D), could occur by progressive loss of developmental potentials from partially restricted intermediates, rather than by sequential production from a self-renewing stem cell. Finally, all four modes could be controlled either cell-autonomously or nonautonomously. (For an example of a stochastic decision that is nonautonomously con- trolled, see Figures 3A and 3B.) Formation of Stem Cells Stem cells in the hematopoietic system, nervous system, gonads, liver, and intestine form de novo during fetal life. The progenitors of stem cells are sometimes referred to as pre-stem cells. Pre-stem cells can be defined as cells whose progeny contribute to tissues other than that derived from the particular stem cell they generate, and that produce stem cells only during a defined interval of development. While the sites of stem cell formation during mammalian fetal development are generally known, the identities of the pre-stem cells are usually not known; furthermore, little is known about the events that regulate the acquisition of stem cell compe- tence. Are there any genes identified that are required for the formation of stem cells? In Drosophila, asymmetrically dividing CNS progenitors, which are in many ways like stem cells, delaminate from a group of neuroectodermal precursor cells. Within this group, the bhlh transcrip- tion factors ACHAETE-SCUTE confer competence to generate the progenitor (Campuzano and Modolell, 1992). A single progenitor is selected from the group of competent cells by lateral inhibition, mediated by Notch proteins and their ligands (Ghysen et al., 1993). Recent data indicate that a similar process underlies the selection of neuronal precursors during primary neurogenesis in Xenopus (Chitnis et al., 1995; Ma et al., 1996).Although such amphibian neuronal precursors have not been defined as stem cells, a similar mechanism may be employed in the mammalian CNS, where stem cells have been clearly identified. Genes encoding both transcrip- tion factors and extracellular signals that are involved in the formation of the hematopoietic system have been identified (Maeno et al., 1996; Porcher et al., 1996), but whether these act at the level of stem cell formation is not yet known. Genetic screens in zebrafish may identify more such molecules (for review, see Zon, 1995). There is evidence that different classes of stem cells can exist simultaneously in the same tissue. Stem cells from different positions along the cephalocaudal axis of the gut exhibit position-specific differences in terms of the differentiated cells they give rise to. When explants from different portions of the intestine were transplanted subcutaneously, the regional differences appeared to persist, providing some evidence that the differences may be intrinsic to the stem cells (Rubin et al., 1992). There is also evidence for regional differences among central nervous system progenitor cells. Mouse basal ganglion progenitors, but not ventral mesenceph- alic progenitors, were able to differentiate into striatal

9 Review: Stem Cell Regulatory Mechanisms 295 cells upon transplantation into rat striatum, suggesting a particularly intriguing subject for study. What is the that the progenitors differed in their ability to adopt the normal function of these cells? Can the system be ma- fates of their new tissues (Campbell et al., 1995). Such nipulated to exploit the regenerative potential implied differences are correlated with the region-specific expression by the existence of these cells, as a recent study (Craig of transcriptional regulators in the neuroepi- et al., 1996) suggests? The answers to such questions thelium from the earliest stages of brain development will advance our understanding of basic developmental (for review, see Puelles and Rubenstein, 1993), sug- mechanisms, and may open new avenues for therapeutic gesting an intrinsic component to such progenitor cell intervention in humans. diversity. On the other hand, there are several cases where neural precursors adopt a correct identity when Acknowledgments transplanted from one region into another (reviewed in Temple and Qian, 1996), suggesting that intrinsic differon We thank Tom Jessell and Irv Weissman for their helpful comments ences may not always irreversibly commit such cells to the manuscript, and Marie-Anne Félix and Paul Sternberg for helpful discussions and for allowing reproduction of their illustration a given fate. in Figure 3. S. J. M. is supported by the Guenther Foundation and The developmental potential of stem cells for a given the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. tissue can differ in time as well as in space. Fetal liver D. J. A. is an Investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. HSCs are thought to give rise to adult bone marrow stem cells (Fleischman et al., 1982). Yet fetal liver stem References cells are able to give rise to several classes of blood cells that adult bone marrow stem cells do not themselves Abkowitz, J.L., Linenberger, M.L., Newton, M.A., Shelton, G.H., Ott, produce (Ikuta et al., 1990; reviewed in Morrison et al., R.L., and Guttorp, P. (1990). Evidence for the maintenance of hema- topoiesis in a large animal by the sequential activation of stem cell 1994). These differences are intrinsic to the stem cells clones. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 87, since they persist even when fetal liver stem cells are Altman, J. (1969). Autoradiographic and histological studies of posttransplanted into adult bone marrow, or when both stem natal neurogenesis. IV. Cell proliferationand migration in the anterior cell types are transplanted into culture. The mechanisms forebrain, with special reference to persisting neurogenesis in the underlying such stage-specific differences in develop- olfactory bulb. J. Comp. Neurol. 137, mental potential are not known. Alvarez-Buylla, A., and Lois, C. (1995). Neuronal stem cells in the brain of adult vertebrates. Stem Cells 13, Artavanis-Tsakonas, S., Matsuno, K., and Fortini, M.E. (1995). Notch Perspective signaling. Science 268, In this review, we have tried to raise and address some Bowerman, B., Draper, B.W., Mello, C.C., and Priess, J.R. (1993). of the key mechanistic questions in stem cell biology. A The maternal gene skn-1 encodes a protein that is distributed unfew salient points emerge. First, molecules that maintain equally in early C. elegans embryos. Cell 74, the stem cell state are beginning to be identified: ligands Caggiano, M., Kauer, J.S. and Hunter, D.D. (1994). Globose basal of Notch family receptors do this from outside the cell, cells are neuronal progenitors in the olfactory epithelium: a lineage and factors like PIE-1 do it from within. At least some analysis using a replication-incompetent retrovirus. Neuron 13, of these mechanisms appear conserved in mammals Second, we are beginning to gain insight into the mecharation Campbell, K., Olsson, M., and Bjorklund, A. (1995). Regional incorponisms and site-specific differentiation of striatal precursors trans- that may regulate stem cell self-renewal capacity, planted to the embryonic forebrain ventricle. Neuron 15, such as expression of telomerase. Third, it is now clear Campuzano, S., and Modolell, J. (1992). Patterning of the Drosophila that at least somestem cells can be instructed to choose nervous system: the achaete-scute gene complex. Trends Genet. one pathway of differentiation, at the expense of others, 8, by growth factors. In other systems, however, stem cells Cepko, C.L., Austin, C.P., Yang, X., Alexiades, M., and Ezzeddine, may make this choice stochastically, and growth factors D. (1996). Cell fate determination in the vertebrate retina. Proc. Natl. may act mainly as survival factors or mitogens for com- Acad. Sci. USA 93, mitted cells. Understanding the interplay between extra- Chenn, A., and McConnell, S.K. (1995). Cleavage orientation and the cellular and intracellular regulatory factors in controlling asymmetric inheritance of Notch1 immunoreactivity in mammalian lineage determination remains an important challenge neurogenesis. Cell 82, for the future. Chitnis, A., Henrique, D., Lewis, J., Ish-Horowicz, D., and Kintner, A great deal of effort in the near term is likely to be C. (1995). Primary neurogenesis in Xenopus embryos regulated by invested in identifying self-renewal and survival factors a homologue of the Drosophila neurogenic gene Delta. Nature 375, for stem cells in various tissues. This in turn will allow investigation of the way in which these factors interact Condron, B., and Zinn, K. (1994). The grasshopper median neuro- blast is a multipotent progenitor cell that generates glia and neurons with cell-intrinsic molecules to maintain the uncommitin distinct temporal phases. J. Neurosci. 14, ted state and transfer it to daughter cells at each stem Craig, C.G., Tropepe, V., Morshead, C.M., Reynolds, B.A., Weiss, cell division. Some of the most interesting future ques- S., and van der Kooy, D. (1996). In vivo growth factor expansion of tions will involve understanding the control of stem cell endogenous subependymal neural precursor cell populations in the behavior at the population level, e.g., in tissues undergo- adult mouse brain. J. Neurosci. 16, ing regeneration in response to injury. What feedback Crittenden, S.L., Troemel, E.R., Evans, T.C., and Kimble, J. (1994). mechanisms operate to maintain the steady state in GLP-1 is localized to the mitotic region of the C. elegans germ line. such tissues, to initiate the regenerative response and Development 120, to restore the system back to steady state once regeneration is achieved? Stem cells in the adult brain present Davis, C.B., and Littman, D.R. (1994). Thymocyte lineage commitment - is it instructed orstochastic. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 6,

Purification and Expansion of Hematopoietic Stem Cells Based on Proteins Expressed by a Novel Stromal Cell Population Our bodies are constantly killing old, nonfunctional, and unneeded cells and making

SAMPLE ESSAY C Should Stem Cells Be Used To Treat Human Diseases? Stem cells can be defined as undifferentiated cells that are generated during the development of the embryo. There are two functions ascribed

STEM CELL FACTS The ISSCR is an independent, nonproft organization providing a global forum for stem cell research and regenerative medicine. WHAT ARE STEM CELLS? Stem cells are the foundation cells for

CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF STEM CELLS. CLONING TECHNOLOGIES 1 Science is discovering the unknown Stem cell field is still in its infancy Human embryonic stem cell research is a decade old, adult stem cell

infoaging guides BIOLOGY OF AGING STEM CELLS An introduction to aging science brought to you by the American Federation for Aging Research WHAT ARE STEM CELLS? Stem cells are cells that, in cell cultures

Introducing stem cells 1 Dear speaker This presentation is intended as a flexible tool for scientists, science communicators and educators. Not all the slides will be useful for any one occasion. Choose

Neurotrophic factors and Their receptors Huang Shu-Hong Institute of neurobiology 1 For decades, scientists believed that brain cells of the central nervous system could not regrow following damage due

Stem Cell Quick Guide: Stem Cell Basics What is a Stem Cell? Stem cells are the starting point from which the rest of the body grows. The adult human body is made up of hundreds of millions of different

Stem Cell:The Promise and The Challenge Chia-Cheng Cheng Chang, Ph.D. Department of Pediatrics and Human Development Michigan State University Stem cells are undifferentiated cells with the capacity for

5 Frequently Asked Questions About Adult Stem Cell Research Stem cells are often referred to in the sociopolitical realm with some level of controversy and beyond that, some level of confusion. Many researchers

Adaptive Immunity Chapter 17: Adaptive (specific) Immunity Bio 139 Dr. Amy Rogers Host defenses that are specific to a particular infectious agent Can be innate or genetic for humans as a group: most microbes

Cell Interactions and Stem Cells Recognize the importance of cell interactions, cell signaling and cell-cell interactions, for coordination of functions in a multi-cellular organism. Learn the three stages

June 26, 2006 Stem Cells: The Real Culprits in Cancer? A dark side of stem cells--their potential to turn malignant--is at the root of a handful of cancers and may be the cause of many more. Eliminating

Chapter 7 Physical interaction between Jamb and Jamc is necessary for myoblast fusion Summary In this chapter I describe a series of transplant experiments designed to further elucidate the function and

An Overview of Cells and Cell Research 1 An Overview of Cells and Cell Research Chapter Outline Model Species and Cell types Cell components Tools of Cell Biology Model Species E. Coli: simplest organism

Stem Cells Part 1: What is a Stem Cell? Stem cells differ from other kinds of cells in the body. When a stem cell divides by mitosis, each new cell has the potential to either remain a stem cell or become

Plant Growth & Development Plant body is unable to move. To survive and grow, plants must be able to alter its growth, development and physiology. Plants are able to produce complex, yet variable forms

Lecture Outline Nerve Cell Differentiation & Developmental Factors Three Stages of CNS Development Brain & Spinal Cord Development Sequential Development of the Regions of the Human Brain Two Main Cell

Mitosis and Meiosis Mitosis Classwork 1. Identify two differences between meiosis and mitosis. 2. Provide an example of a type of cell in the human body that would undergo mitosis. 3. Does cell division

Name Period Chapter 13: Meiosis and Sexual Life Cycles Concept 13.1 Offspring acquire genes from parents by inheriting chromosomes 1. Let s begin with a review of several terms that you may already know.

Human Cloning The Science and Ethics of Transplantation Rudolf Jaenisch, M.D. In addition to the moral argument against the use of somatic-cell nuclear for the creation of a child ( reproductive cloning

WHAT CELL REPRODUCTION ACCOMPLISHES Reproduction may result in the birth of new organisms but more commonly involves the production of new cells. When a cell undergoes reproduction, or cell division, two

Stem Cells is the main material for building and regeneration of the body Stem cells are not differentiated and can transform to any cell of organism Stem cells are capable of indefinite renewal through

Stem Cell Information The official National Institutes of Health resource for stem cell research Stem Cell Basics Stem cells have the remarkable potential to develop into many different cell types in the

Multiple Choice Review Mitosis & Meiosis 1. Which of the following accurately describes the one of the major divisions of mitosis? a. During the mitotic phase, cells are performing their primary function

Biology and Society Unit Five: Human Reproduction Topic Six: Stem Cell Research The issue of stem cell research burst on the scientific scene in November of 1998 when researchers first reported the isolation

Stem Cells and Hope for Patients by Maureen Condic, Ph.D. Most Americans know someone afflicted with an incurable medical condition. The possibility of stem cell cures has given hope to many who face such

October 2003 Human stem cell research: a novel technology that will benefit patients Information and Position Paper EuropaBio, the European Association for Bio-industries, has 35 corporate members operating

POSITION STATEMENT REGARDING THE USE OF EMBRYONIC AND ADULT HUMAN STEM CELLS IN BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH October 2004 Preamble The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and the American Neurological Association

Briefing on the second reading of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, Monday 19 November 2007. Prepared by the Medical Research Council, Royal Society and Wellcome Trust The Medical Research Council,

Trasposable elements: P elements In 1938 Marcus Rhodes provided the first genetic description of an unstable mutation, an allele of a gene required for the production of pigment in maize. This instability

AP BIOLOGY 2012 SCORING GUIDELINES Question 1 Note: At least 1 point must be earned from each of parts (a), (b), (c), and (d) in order to earn a maximum score of 10. The ability to reproduce is a characteristic

Growth of Animal Cells in Culture The ability to study cells depends largely on how readily they can be grown and manipulated in the laboratory. Although the process is technically far more difficult than

AP Biology 2015 Free-Response Questions College Board, Advanced Placement Program, AP, AP Central, and the acorn logo are registered trademarks of the College Board. AP Central is the official online home

Call for Interdisciplinary Projects Sevres 2014 A General Information Project title Influence of the skin mechanical and microbial properties on hair growth Acronym TADDEI: The Ambiguous Dupond and Dupont

15 Stem Cell Research t a l k it o v e r 1 c l a s s se s s i o n Overview Students read about current scientific research on and the social controversy over embryonic stem cells. On a KWL literacy strategy

Meiosis and Sexual Life Cycles Chapter 13 1 Ojectives Distinguish between the following terms: somatic cell and gamete; autosome and sex chromosomes; haploid and diploid. List the phases of meiosis I and

Overview: Variations on a Theme Living organisms are distinguished by their ability to reproduce their own kind Genetics is the scientific study of heredity and variation Heredity is the transmission of

Stem Cell Basics Last modified on April 08, 2015 About this document This primer on stem cells is intended for anyone who wishes to learn more about the biological properties of stem cells, the important

CHAPTER 14 CELL SURFACE MARKERS OF T-CELLS, B-CELLS AND MACROPHAGES An understanding of the distinct families of molecules present on different cells of the immune system provides the tools for distinguishing

Embryo Clay Model Embryogenesis and Stem Cell Development Objective: To identify stages and locations of early embryonic development To see at what point stem cells are totipotent, pluripotent, and multipotent

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY CENTRE FOR BRAIN REPAIR A layman's account of our scientific objectives What is Brain Damage? Many forms of trauma and disease affect the nervous system to produce permanent neurological

Cell Division Mitosis and the Cell Cycle A Chromosome and Sister Chromatids Key Points About Chromosome Structure A chromosome consists of DNA that is wrapped around proteins (histones) and condensed Each

San Diego Stem Cell Treatment Center Frequently Asked Questions What is a Stem Cell? A stem cell is basically any cell that can replicate and differentiate. This means the cell can not only multiply, but

Name Period Overview 1. An organism s development is controlled by the genome of the zygote as well as by molecules from the mother that are in the cytoplasm of the egg. What are these proteins and RNAs

Name Class Date Biology Ch 10 Cell Growth & Division (10.1-10.2) For Questions 1 4, write True if the statement is true. If the statement is false, change the underlined word or words to make the statement

Stem Cell Therapy In Diabetes Mellitus Professor Megahid Abuelmagd Diabetes And Endocrine Unit. Mansoura Faculty Of Medicine For many years, there has been great interest in approaches to the replacement

Stem cells and motor neurone disease F Stem cell research has fuelled hope of a treatment for a variety of conditions. This information sheet explains what these cells are and includes details of the current